Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
DC FieldValue
dc.titleThe accuracy of healthcare worker versus self collected (2-in-1) Oropharyngeal and Bilateral Mid-Turbinate (OPMT) swabs and saliva samples for SARS-CoV-2
dc.contributor.authorTan, Seow Yen
dc.contributor.authorTey, Hong Liang
dc.contributor.authorLim, Ernest Tian Hong
dc.contributor.authorToh, Song Tar
dc.contributor.authorChan, Yiong Huak
dc.contributor.authorTan, Pei Ting
dc.contributor.authorLee, Sing Ai
dc.contributor.authorTan, Cheryl Xiaotong
dc.contributor.authorKoh, Gerald Choon Huat
dc.contributor.authorTan, Thean Yen
dc.contributor.authorSiau, Chuin
dc.identifier.citationTan, Seow Yen, Tey, Hong Liang, Lim, Ernest Tian Hong, Toh, Song Tar, Chan, Yiong Huak, Tan, Pei Ting, Lee, Sing Ai, Tan, Cheryl Xiaotong, Koh, Gerald Choon Huat, Tan, Thean Yen, Siau, Chuin (2020-12-16). The accuracy of healthcare worker versus self collected (2-in-1) Oropharyngeal and Bilateral Mid-Turbinate (OPMT) swabs and saliva samples for SARS-CoV-2. PLOS ONE 15 (12). ScholarBank@NUS Repository.
dc.description.abstractBackground Self-sampling for SARS-CoV-2 would significantly raise testing capacity and reduce healthcare worker (HCW) exposure to infectious droplets personal, and protective equipment (PPE) use. Methods We conducted a diagnostic accuracy study where subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (n = 401) and healthy volunteers (n = 100) were asked to self-swab from their oropharynx and mid-turbinate (OPMT), and self-collect saliva. The results of these samples were compared to an OPMT performed by a HCW in the same patient at the same session. Results In subjects confirmed to have COVID-19, the sensitivities of the HCW-swab, self-swab, saliva, and combined self-swab plus saliva samples were 82.8%, 75.1%, 74.3% and 86.5% respectively. All samples obtained from healthy volunteers were tested negative. Compared to HCW-swab, the sensitivities of a self-swab sample and saliva sample were inferior by 8.7% (95%CI: 2.4% to 15.0%, p = 0.006) and 9.5% (95%CI: 3.1% to 15.8%, p = 0.003) respectively. The combined detection rate of self-swab and saliva had a sensitivity of 2.7% (95%CI: -2.6% to 8.0%, p = 0.321). The sensitivity of both the self-collection methods are higher when the Ct value of the HCW swab is less than 30. The specificity of both the selfswab and saliva testing was 100% (95% CI 96.4% to 100%). Conclusion Our study provides evidence that sensitivities of self-collected OPMT swab and saliva samples were inferior to a HCW swab, but they could still be useful testing tools in the appropriate clinical settings. Copyright:
dc.subjectScience & Technology
dc.subjectMultidisciplinary Sciences
dc.subjectScience & Technology - Other Topics
dc.contributor.departmentDEAN'S OFFICE (MEDICINE)
dc.contributor.departmentOBSTETRICS & GYNAECOLOGY
dc.contributor.departmentDUKE-NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL
dc.contributor.departmentDEAN'S OFFICE (DUKE-NUS MEDICAL SCHOOL)
dc.description.sourcetitlePLOS ONE
Appears in Collections:Staff Publications

Show simple item record
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormatAccess SettingsVersion 
The accuracy of healthcare worker versus self collected (2-in-1) Oropharyngeal and Bilateral Mid-Turbinate (OPMT) swabs and .pdf627.73 kBAdobe PDF



Google ScholarTM



Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.